Activity
From 03/20/2013 to 04/18/2013
04/18/2013
- TI 01:06 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- I will be looking in to this very soon and will report back.
cheers
/Tim - MK 12:18 PM Software Development: RE: DDR3 Factory EEPROM Incorrect
- Tim,
Thanks. The system did seem to boot fine from MMC with the MLO/u-boot built from git.
At this point I'm more concerned about programming and booting from NAND on the 512MB board. That doesn't appear to work using the same me... - TI 07:24 AM Software Development: RE: DDR3 Factory EEPROM Incorrect
- Michael
The DDR3 modules require the newer version of u-boot (and MLO). From the output you have listed above, the first (non-working) attempt was using an old MLO.
The old version of MLO does not know how to configure the DDR3 RAM, an...
04/17/2013
- MK 11:10 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- I think I am having the same problem as Kim.
I use similar scripts:
mmc rescan; mw.b 0x82000000 0xFF 0x80000; fatload mmc 0 0x82000000 MLO; nandecc hw 2; nand erase 0x0 0x80000; nand write.i 0x82000000 0x0 $filesize
mmc rescan; mw... - MK 10:25 PM Software Development: RE: DDR3 Factory EEPROM Incorrect
- Just rebuilt u-boot.img out of git, and now my system boots fine.
Still curious about what is in the factory EEPROM and how I can recover if lost. - We received a batch of AM335x boards with 512MB RAM/NAND that appear to have no factory configuration programmed:
@U-Boot SPL 2011.09-00000-g23e81b9-dirty (Feb 24 2012 - 11:15:23)
Texas Instruments Revision detection unimplemented
E...
04/16/2013
- KW 08:36 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- I have programmed both MLO and u-boot with the same results. It appears MLO is not loading & running. Why are the NAND blocks marked bad after flashing MLO and u-boot?
We're mainly have DDR3 (AM3354) CPU modules and ran out of the few... - MW 05:19 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- Hi,
Other than the fact that the selected boot mode will try to use the UART first over the NAND (and you aren't programming u-boot, only the MLO -- you'll need to program both into NAND), it's not obvious to me why this is not workin...
04/12/2013
- KW 03:49 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- MW 03:37 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- Thanks.
What are your boot jumper settings?
-Mike
- KW 03:34 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- Here's my programming steps with NAND OOB info.:
U-Boot# nand bad
Device 0 bad blocks:
00780000
U-Boot# mmc rescan
U-Boot# mw.b 0x82000000 0xFF 0x20000
U-Boot# fatload mmc 0 0x82000000 MLO
reading MLO
39123 bytes read
U-... - MW 03:15 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- Could you provide any details on what your FLASH procedure is and what you are seeing when you try to boot?
What bootmode are you configuring for FLASH boot?
This will allow us to reproduce the problem here.
Thanks.
-Mike
- KW 03:12 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- Yes, MLO & u-Boot were rebuilt for DDR3 and ran fine on the 3354 w/ DDR3 booting from SD card.
-Kim
- MW 02:45 PM Software Development: RE: Difficulty in flashing MLO and U-Boot to the AM3354 with 512MB NAND
- Errr.... any more details than that???
The MLO and u-Boot images must be updated for the 3354 DDR3 configuration. Are they using the correct version of the MLO and u-Boot?
What is the FLASH procedure [edit] being used?
-Mike
- Customer states that they are having difficulty flashing MLO and U-Boot into the 3354-GX-X38 module. No issues encountered when flashing MLO and U-Boot in the 3359-GX-226 module.
04/11/2013
-
10:57 AM
Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- We finally have something that will work, but is not ideal. By using itest we look to see which
of our images is the preferred for booting and then checks the image, and if it is good, unzips
it and jumps. The main issue is that this...
04/10/2013
- JC 03:33 PM Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- John C.,
Looks like md might do what you want.
/* Memory Display
*
* Syntax:
* md{.b, .w, .l} {addr} {len}
*/
md.l 80000000 1
80000000: 807fffe0 ....
Unfortunately its output seems rather verbose.
http://sup... - JC 03:21 PM Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- John C.
Heres a link to the source code for the itest command.
http://support.criticallink.com/gitweb/?p=u-boot-mityarm-335x.git;a=blob;f=common/cmd_itest.c;h=2a238a43e5d13e56db36665562162eee5e512705;hb=HEAD
It doesn't have any op... -
02:47 PM
Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- Tim and Mike,
I found this command that works in testing the contents of memory. Is there any way to get that value into
a param?
if itest.l *80000000 == 80800020; then echo error; fi;
Thanks,
John C. -
08:40 AM
Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- Thanks Tim and Mike,
I think that unless it is an easy port of updating/saving the u-boot environment params(like in I need to be
done today), modifying one of the u-boot commands might be the way to go. We also have another l... - TI 08:15 AM Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- Not sure if this will do what you really want, but if you load the image from flash (read the max image size into ram, thus avoiding the need to know it beforehand)
you can then run the imi command on it (as it has a u-boot image header... - MW 07:13 AM Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- Hi John,
u-Boot doesn't really have much for interpretative type scripting. I don't think you can accomplish this with the stock u-Boot.
Options:
1. You could easily extend the u-Boot crc32 command or add your own to create a e...
04/09/2013
-
10:38 PM
Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- Hey Jonathan,
The issue is that we are burning our image into flash from our StarterWare code base. The new
StarterWare image is burned into SPI flash memory location 0x300000 and has a mkimage header. When y... - JC 04:35 PM Software Development: RE: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- I'm unsure how to do what your looking for. All the references I could find have you set the image size in an environment variable when it is flashed to the spi flash.
Example: http://wiki.atlas-embedded.com/index.php?title=Flashing_Li... -
04:08 PM
Software Development: Assigning params from memory in u-boot
- Hi,
Were are in the final stages of booting our StarterWare image from uboot. Currently we have our compressed image
loaded into SPI flash with a mkimage header attached on the top. I am trying to make a uboot script that will loa...
04/04/2013
-
03:07 PM
Software Development: RE: No unzip in MityArm uboot?
- Thanks Jonathan,
I added #define CONFIG_CMD_UNZIP to the file, rebuilt u-boot and burned it into NAND. So I was able to do the following
from a u-boot prompt and our application runs:
mw.b 0x8C100000 0x00 2E274
sf probe 0:... - JC 12:31 PM Software Development: RE: No unzip in MityArm uboot?
- In the file include/configs/mityarm335x.h you need to insert
_#define CONFIG_CMD_UNZIP_ -
12:10 PM
Software Development: RE: No unzip in MityArm uboot?
- Where is the board header file?
Thanks,
John C. - MW 11:37 AM Software Development: RE: No unzip in MityArm uboot?
- You will probably need to rebuild it and enable the optioncommand by adding a CMD_XXX (CMD_ZIP? would need to check) to the board header file.
Many options / features of u-boot may not be enabled in our default u-boot application in o... -
10:38 AM
Software Development: No unzip in MityArm uboot?
- Hi,
We are running the critical link u-boot version(below) on the MityArm and it appears that there is not a unzip command available. The reason we need it is that the StarterWare image we are running is over 3Mbytes in size and ...
03/26/2013
- MW 07:12 PM PCB Development: RE: VBACKUP Current Draw
- Mark,
Great catch! This is certainly acceptable, and we'll likely modify either our u-boot code or kernel code to disable these pull-downs. Both pins are tied externally (BOOT1 to VRTC via 10K, Boot0 to ground), so there is no need ... -
05:54 PM
PCB Development: RE: VBACKUP Current Draw
- Mike,
I tested the AM3354 DDR3 module here as well and also saw the ~10uA current draw on VBACKUP.
One other thing I tried worked for me in lowering this current. On your module, it appears that you have the PMIC BOOT0 input tied ... - MW 05:25 PM PCB Development: RE: VBACKUP Current Draw
- Hi Mark,
For the DDR2 modules, I'm pretty sure you need the -1C revision for the fix. However, the AM3354 DDR3 module should have the RTC fix already applied. I tested the first prototypes here and was able to see 10 uA on them as o... -
05:07 PM
PCB Development: RE: VBACKUP Current Draw
- Hi Mike,
Thanks for the quick response. I believe I have modules covered in the errata. Of the three modules I've tested with, one is an 80-000444RC-1-D and the other two are 80-000509RL-1B.
I also have one of the AM3354 DDR3 mod... - MW 04:08 PM PCB Development: RE: VBACKUP Current Draw
- Hi Mark,
We need to confirm what revision of module you have (there was Errata on earlier modules where the VBACKUP draw is quite high). Can you please get the 80- number off the module?
Check the "Module Revision History Page":ht... -
03:54 PM
PCB Development: VBACKUP Current Draw
- I am attempting to replicate the VBACKUP current draw information you supplied in the Hardware Design section of the wiki. I have a 3359-GX-226-RC module on the MityARM development board. I removed the battery (which was dead by the wa...